To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

The MAROON Vol. 64, No. 10 Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana 70118 November 8, 1985 Women's issues often ignored By Becky Westerlund Assistant News Editor CONFRONTING COMPLACENCY Julie Leßlanc is working toward a double major to better prepare herself for a world filled with opportunities. But she is aware that her education is no guarantee for success because, when she gets out into the real world, the game won't always be fair — she may face discrimination because she is a woman. Helen Regis was aware of national issues concerning women, but didn't feel touched by them. Despite not wanting to be labeled a feminist, she followed her curiosity to a local meeting of the National Organization for Women to hear what members were talking about. She now notices problems peculiar to women. Darilyn Olidge's concern is equality. Being female and black, she wants equal status, equal compensation and equal respect. She wants to be judged on the basis of her accomplishment. These students are exceptions at Loyola. Most men and women on campus are unaware or unconcerned about the changing roles and issues which will affect them once they leave Loyola, according to a study this past spring on campus by the Subcommittee for the Concerns of Women. Eleanor Smeal, president of the National Organization for Women, has said the largest problem with college students is that their view of the world is equalitarian, although the world is not. "Especially women in college situations — they by and large have not run up against discrimination yet. They have this strong feeling it won't hit them," she said. Smeal's remark tags the attitudes of a majority of students on Loyola's campus. The role of women is changing, but it seems students and faculty are not fully aware of those changes, Vincent Knipfing, vice president for Student Affairs, said. Many women are participating in furthering stereotypes that are derogatory toward women, Knipfing said. For example, he said an advertisement featuring a sketch of a large-breasted woman was posted on campus. Thinking it was drawn and posted by men, he checked and discovered it had been done by women. "It caused me some concern that they, through their own ignorance, were participating in a stereotype that was really offensive to their dignity as women," Knipfing said. In response to his observations, Knipfing said the Office of Student Affairs formed the Subcommittee for the Concerns of Women to examine women's concerns and to find ways to begin dialogue between men and women on the new role of women. This action was encouraged by the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities. In concluding the report that they submitted to the Office of Student Affairs in May 1985, the committee said the most striking finding was the lack of awareness among students. "That makes me really sad because I see around me that there's a lot of potential in women that's not being tapped,"said Regis, a political science junior. "I think that if they're not aware of that then the change is pretty far away," she said. "If women themselves aren't even aware that they're missing out, then they're not ready yet to bring about a change." —Photo by John McCusker Campus lacks awareness Referendum's results invalid, court decides By Mary Caffrey Staff writer The Student Government Association parking garage/recreation center referendum has been recalled by the Student Government Court of Review, an unprecedented move that lends new controversy to the proposed facility. The SGA's referendum took place Oct. 14-15, and 53.5 percent of the students voting approved a tuition increase to help fund the project. But on Oct. 26, the court decided 3-1 to overturn those results. "The referendum was compromised," Brad Trask, chief justice of the court, said. "It's hard to say by how much, but just the fact that it was compromised gave us [the Court of Review] reason to recall it." The Court of Review is a five-member body appointed by the SGA president. Each member serves a two-year term. They rule on all questions regarding student elections and campaigns. At its Tuesday meeting, the SGA decided to avoid discussion of a new referendum until after the University Board of Trustees meets Nov. 21. SGA4?resident Byron Arthur said he thought the Board would decide whether or not to build the facility within the next few weeks. "I don't see them [the Board of Trustees] delaying the decision for a long time," Arthur said. "1 don't even know how much they want to wait until the next Board meeting," he said. The court said it believed the SGA had honorable intentions, Trask said, but proceeded to present a one-sided, pro-referendum campaign that may have improperly affected the results. The announcement ruling the first election invalid came after three hours of deliberation. The court also had heard the testimonies of the involved groups on Oct. 24. Board left with facility decision By Mary Caffrey Staff writer The Student Government Association's decision to table discussion of a new referendum leaves the fate of the parking garage/recreation center in the hands of the University Board of Trustees. The SGA decided not to discuss conducting a new referendum until the board makes a decision at its Nov. 21 meeting. The board can ask the SGA to hold another referendum, or it can decide whether to build the facility without student approval. "We were waiting for the SGA's reaction," the Rev. Stephen Rowntree, S.J., a member of the board's Student Affairs Committee, said. "Now we'll have to consider this [the SGA's delay in considering a new referendum] in our decision." Rowntree said he could not speculate on what the board's final decision would be, but said the board has the right to go ahead with the project without another student referendum. See Recall /page 6 See Hoard/page ' See Women /page 4

Archival image is an 8-bit greyscale tiff that was scanned from microfilm at 300 dpi. The original file size was 1493.14 KB.

Transcript

The MAROON Vol. 64, No. 10 Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana 70118 November 8, 1985 Women's issues often ignored By Becky Westerlund Assistant News Editor CONFRONTING COMPLACENCY Julie Leßlanc is working toward a double major to better prepare herself for a world filled with opportunities. But she is aware that her education is no guarantee for success because, when she gets out into the real world, the game won't always be fair — she may face discrimination because she is a woman. Helen Regis was aware of national issues concerning women, but didn't feel touched by them. Despite not wanting to be labeled a feminist, she followed her curiosity to a local meeting of the National Organization for Women to hear what members were talking about. She now notices problems peculiar to women. Darilyn Olidge's concern is equality. Being female and black, she wants equal status, equal compensation and equal respect. She wants to be judged on the basis of her accomplishment. These students are exceptions at Loyola. Most men and women on campus are unaware or unconcerned about the changing roles and issues which will affect them once they leave Loyola, according to a study this past spring on campus by the Subcommittee for the Concerns of Women. Eleanor Smeal, president of the National Organization for Women, has said the largest problem with college students is that their view of the world is equalitarian, although the world is not. "Especially women in college situations — they by and large have not run up against discrimination yet. They have this strong feeling it won't hit them," she said. Smeal's remark tags the attitudes of a majority of students on Loyola's campus. The role of women is changing, but it seems students and faculty are not fully aware of those changes, Vincent Knipfing, vice president for Student Affairs, said. Many women are participating in furthering stereotypes that are derogatory toward women, Knipfing said. For example, he said an advertisement featuring a sketch of a large-breasted woman was posted on campus. Thinking it was drawn and posted by men, he checked and discovered it had been done by women. "It caused me some concern that they, through their own ignorance, were participating in a stereotype that was really offensive to their dignity as women," Knipfing said. In response to his observations, Knipfing said the Office of Student Affairs formed the Subcommittee for the Concerns of Women to examine women's concerns and to find ways to begin dialogue between men and women on the new role of women. This action was encouraged by the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities. In concluding the report that they submitted to the Office of Student Affairs in May 1985, the committee said the most striking finding was the lack of awareness among students. "That makes me really sad because I see around me that there's a lot of potential in women that's not being tapped,"said Regis, a political science junior. "I think that if they're not aware of that then the change is pretty far away," she said. "If women themselves aren't even aware that they're missing out, then they're not ready yet to bring about a change." —Photo by John McCusker Campus lacks awareness Referendum's results invalid, court decides By Mary Caffrey Staff writer The Student Government Association parking garage/recreation center referendum has been recalled by the Student Government Court of Review, an unprecedented move that lends new controversy to the proposed facility. The SGA's referendum took place Oct. 14-15, and 53.5 percent of the students voting approved a tuition increase to help fund the project. But on Oct. 26, the court decided 3-1 to overturn those results. "The referendum was compromised," Brad Trask, chief justice of the court, said. "It's hard to say by how much, but just the fact that it was compromised gave us [the Court of Review] reason to recall it." The Court of Review is a five-member body appointed by the SGA president. Each member serves a two-year term. They rule on all questions regarding student elections and campaigns. At its Tuesday meeting, the SGA decided to avoid discussion of a new referendum until after the University Board of Trustees meets Nov. 21. SGA4?resident Byron Arthur said he thought the Board would decide whether or not to build the facility within the next few weeks. "I don't see them [the Board of Trustees] delaying the decision for a long time," Arthur said. "1 don't even know how much they want to wait until the next Board meeting," he said. The court said it believed the SGA had honorable intentions, Trask said, but proceeded to present a one-sided, pro-referendum campaign that may have improperly affected the results. The announcement ruling the first election invalid came after three hours of deliberation. The court also had heard the testimonies of the involved groups on Oct. 24. Board left with facility decision By Mary Caffrey Staff writer The Student Government Association's decision to table discussion of a new referendum leaves the fate of the parking garage/recreation center in the hands of the University Board of Trustees. The SGA decided not to discuss conducting a new referendum until the board makes a decision at its Nov. 21 meeting. The board can ask the SGA to hold another referendum, or it can decide whether to build the facility without student approval. "We were waiting for the SGA's reaction," the Rev. Stephen Rowntree, S.J., a member of the board's Student Affairs Committee, said. "Now we'll have to consider this [the SGA's delay in considering a new referendum] in our decision." Rowntree said he could not speculate on what the board's final decision would be, but said the board has the right to go ahead with the project without another student referendum. See Recall /page 6 See Hoard/page ' See Women /page 4